Take the 2-minute tour ×
Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Zechariah 14:9, talking about a future time (end times?), says:

And the LORD will be king over all the earth. On that day the LORD will be one and his name one. (ESV)

But God already said he is one:

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one (Deut 6:4)

Maybe "and his name one" says that everybody will finally get it, but what does it mean by "will be one"? Zechariah wrote hundreds of years after Deut. Is it possible he did not know about it? If he did know Deut, why say something will happen that scripture he knew of said is already true? (I am not trying to say what is true for us now, just asking about Zech.)

share|improve this question
    
This might help. Check out the NASB version of the text:And the Lord will be king over all the earth; in that day the Lord will be the only one, and His name the only one. Note the word only here, as in He will no longer have anyone else trying to compete for his throne. Not like it's any competition anyways but you get the idea. –  user4337 Jun 18 at 4:11

1 Answer 1

And the Lord shall become King over all the earth; on that day shall the Lord be one, and His name one.(Zech. 14:9)

Rashi's commentary reads,

*"shall the Lord be one: For all the nations shall abandon their vanities and acknowledge Him, that He is one, and [that] no strange deity is with Him,and His name one: That His name shall be mentioned by everyone. *

Keil & Delitzsch's commentary reads,

"To this blessing there is added the higher spiritual blessing, that Jehovah will be King over all the land, and His name alone will be mentioned and revered.

Interestingly, Rashi's commentary includes the whole earth, whereas Keil & Delitzsch's only include Israel. They don't go into detail as to why; my suspicion is they are affected by a theological bias that prevents them from acknowledging the obvious.

I'm not a Hebrew scholar, but it appears the context is not one of the 'personages' of God, but that there is no more 'contest' as to who God is. There is but one deity, and that is God. That means any 'created being' cannot replace the pre-existent God.

The question of course is "What about Jesus?". and the answer is found in John 1:1-3,

" 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

God is one, there have been many rivals to Him. Zech. 13:2 says,

And it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered: and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.

The Lord alone and His name will be mentioned, no other idol will be mentioned. This is the context of Zech. 14:9.

share|improve this answer
    
Oh, so "be one" is more like "acknowledged as one"? That makes sense. I don't understand what you say about Jesus though, are you saying he is a rival to one God? So he needs to no more be remembered as part of "only one mentioned"? –  user4275 Jun 20 at 22:33
    
@user4275 Since the question asks about the 'oneness' of God, and not the personages of God, I didn't go into a lengthy exegesis of Jesus, although that is the obvious question. Jesus is one of the 3 personages of God, yet they are all "one". –  user2479 Jun 21 at 3:05

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.